editorNPR Digital Services RSS Generator 0.94Nina Totenberg is NPR's award-winning legal affairs correspondent. Her reports air regularly on NPR's critically acclaimed newsmagazines All Things Considered , Morning Edition , and Weekend Edition . Totenberg's coverage of the Supreme Court and legal affairs has won her widespread recognition. Newsweek says, "The mainstays [of NPR] are Morning Edition and All Things Considered. But the creme de la creme is Nina Totenberg." In 1991, her ground-breaking report about University of Oklahoma Law Professor Anita Hill's allegations of sexual harassment by Judge Clarence Thomas led the Senate Judiciary Committee to re-open Thomas's Supreme Court confirmation hearings to consider Hill's charges. NPR received the prestigious George Foster Peabody Award for its gavel-to-gavel coverage — anchored by Totenberg — of both the original hearings and the inquiry into Anita Hill's allegations, and for Totenberg's reports and exclusive interview with Hill. That same coverage earned Totenberg additionalNPR Digital Services RSS Generator 0.94Nina TotenbergSat, 10 Mar 2018 01:14:38 +0000Nina Totenberghttp://krwg.org
Nina TotenbergCopyright 2018 NPR. To see more, visit AILSA CHANG, HOST: Each of the 50 states has a law creating a campaign-free buffer zone outside polling places, laws the Supreme Court has long upheld. Today the court examined even stricter laws inside polling places. NPR legal affairs correspondent Nina Totenberg reports. NINA TOTENBERG, BYLINE: Every state has some sort of a ban on political apparel and buttons inside of polling places. All were enacted in the late 1800s and early 1900s to end rampant violence and intimidation on election days. Minnesota and some 10 other states have the strictest laws. Minnesota bars voters from wearing apparel, buttons or badges that bear a, quote, "political message." Under the state's enforcement guidelines, poll watchers are told to ask any voter wearing such a message to either cover it up with a jacket or sweater or take it off. The guidelines give as examples Tea Party or moveon.org T-shirts. Enter Andrew Cilek, a conservative political activist whoSupreme Court Examines Strict Laws For Inside Polling Placeshttp://krwg.org/post/supreme-court-examines-strict-laws-inside-polling-places
155143 as http://krwg.orgWed, 28 Feb 2018 21:33:00 +0000Supreme Court Examines Strict Laws For Inside Polling PlacesNina TotenbergUpdated 6:05 p.m. ET Every state has a law creating campaign-free buffer zones outside of polling places — laws the Supreme Court has long upheld. On Wednesday, the justices tackled similar and even stricter laws that bar "political" apparel inside polling places. The court did not indicate which way it was leaning in questioning Wednesday. Lawyers on both sides of the arguments were pressed hard. Justice Anthony Kennedy, perhaps the court's most vociferous advocate for free speech, repeatedly noted the necessity for decorum and solemnity in the voting place. Where do we draw the line as to what is permissible? Kennedy asked. J. David Breemer, the attorney representing Andrew Cilek and the Minnesota Voters Alliance, said he didn't know. The problem with the Minnesota statute, Breemer argued, is it seeks to silence so much speech. The statute in question says the following : "A person may not display campaign material, post signs, ask, solicit, or in any manner try to induce or persuadeShould Polling Places Remain Politics-Free? Justices Incredulous At Both Sideshttp://krwg.org/post/polling-place-battleground-freedom-speech-versus-freedom-intimidation
155091 as http://krwg.orgWed, 28 Feb 2018 10:03:00 +0000Should Polling Places Remain Politics-Free? Justices Incredulous At Both SidesNina Totenberghttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Dqpvh6_z0g Updated at 2:05 p.m. ET It's not that uncommon to hear someone complaining that politicians are corrupt. But you wouldn't expect to be thrown in jail for it. That's exactly what happened to Fane Lozman at a City Council meeting in Florida. On Tuesday, that arrest got to the U.S. Supreme Court, and it could have implications not just for Lozman but for the limits of First Amendment protections of freedom of speech. A video of Lozman's arrest can be viewed here : Oddly, it's not Lozman's first trip to the nation's highest court. Five years ago, the financial trader won his first case against the city of Riviera Beach when the city seized his floating home to make room for a harbor redevelopment. Today's case could affect a lot more people. Supreme Court justices on Tuesday seemed to express that they agreed Lozman's arrest may have been unjustified and over the line, but they were having trouble clearly defining the line. What was the lineThe Curious Case Of A Florida Man Who Called Politicians Corrupt, Got Thrown In Jailhttp://krwg.org/post/curious-case-florida-man-who-called-politicians-corrupt-got-thrown-jail
155011 as http://krwg.orgTue, 27 Feb 2018 10:02:00 +0000The Curious Case Of A Florida Man Who Called Politicians Corrupt, Got Thrown In JailNina TotenbergUpdated at 5:11 p.m. ET The Supreme Court heard arguments Tuesday about whether emails stored overseas are subject to a U.S. warrant. It all revolved around a 1986 law, five years before the "World Wide Web" even existed. It was the cloud and robots meet Marty McFly. And the justices didn't seem to be buying arguments from Microsoft, an American tech company headquartered in Redmond, Wash., which is trying to protect the data. The question facing the justices didn't exist a few decades ago — does an email provider, faced with a search warrant issued in the United States, have to turn over a customer's email content when those data are stored outside the country? The case The case, United States v. Microsoft, involves a federal drug-trafficking investigation in which law enforcement obtained a warrant for all the data associated with a suspect's Microsoft account. In response, Microsoft turned over the user's account identification information that is stored in Redmond, but refused toCourt Seems Unconvinced Of Microsoft's Argument To Shield Email Data Stored Overseashttp://krwg.org/post/new-front-data-privacy-supreme-court-can-us-seize-emails-stored-abroad
155012 as http://krwg.orgTue, 27 Feb 2018 10:02:00 +0000Court Seems Unconvinced Of Microsoft's Argument To Shield Email Data Stored OverseasNina TotenbergUpdated at 2:31 p.m. ET The Supreme Court heard fiery arguments Monday in a case that could remove a key revenue stream for public sector unions. A sharply divided court could be poised to overturn a 40-year-old Supreme Court decision that would further undermine an already shrinking union movement. Attorneys for Mark Janus, a child support specialist for the state of Illinois, argue that people like Janus, who choose not to join a union, shouldn't be compelled to pay partial union fees. The union argues that he should because he benefits from collective bargaining negotiations. The Supreme Court agreed in 1977, but that could change with the new conservative tilt of the court. When a decision is reached, expected in June, all eyes will be on Trump-appointed Justice Neil Gorsuch, who was uncharacteristically quiet in Monday's proceedings. He asked no questions and is likely to be the deciding vote, given that the other justices split 4 to 4 in a similar case in 2016. That case wasSupreme Court Hears Fiery Arguments In Case That Could Gut Public Sector Unionshttp://krwg.org/post/supreme-court-could-bleed-unions-dry
154953 as http://krwg.orgMon, 26 Feb 2018 11:32:00 +0000Supreme Court Hears Fiery Arguments In Case That Could Gut Public Sector UnionsNina TotenbergThe U.S. Supreme Court began churning out opinions Wednesday, producing four decisions — as many as the justices have produced over the past 4 1/2 months combined. The topics were varied, touching on subjects ranging from gun control to whistleblower protection and terrorism. A "muddle" on guns? In a week highlighted by the national gun control debate, the court ruled that a North Carolina man who pleaded guilty to illegal firearm possession may still appeal his conviction on constitutional grounds. The case began on May 30, 2013, when police suspicions were aroused by a jeep illegally parked in an employees-only lot on the U.S. Capitol grounds. When owner Rodney Class returned and refused to allow a search, Capitol Police obtained a warrant and found two loaded pistols, a rifle and extra magazines of ammunition. Questioned by the FBI at Capitol Police headquarters, Class identified himself as a "constitutional bounty hunter" and "private attorney general" who traveled the country withSupreme Court Gets Moving, Issuing As Many Decisions In One Day As It Has In 5 Monthshttp://krwg.org/post/supreme-court-gets-moving-issuing-many-decisions-one-day-it-has-5-months
154684 as http://krwg.orgWed, 21 Feb 2018 22:59:00 +0000Supreme Court Gets Moving, Issuing As Many Decisions In One Day As It Has In 5 MonthsNina TotenbergThe U.S. Supreme Court has, once again, declined to hear a Second Amendment case, turning away a constitutional challenge to a 10-day waiting period for the purchase of guns in California. The court's decision not to hear the case came over an angry dissent from conservative Justice Clarence Thomas. The decision to stay out of the California case is the latest sign of the justices' reluctance to enter the national debate over gun control. While the decision has no legal importance, the practical effect is to leave in place California's waiting period, and others like it. Such laws are designed in part to prevent impulsive violence and suicides. Gun rights activists had argued that the 10-day waiting period violates the second amendment guarantee of a right to keep and bear arms, especially for those who already legally own guns and have passed background checks. But the court, as it has done consistently in recent years, decided not to take up the case. The last major set of gun casesSupreme Court Won't Hear Challenge To California's Gun Lawshttp://krwg.org/post/supreme-court-wont-hear-challenge-californias-gun-laws
154589 as http://krwg.orgTue, 20 Feb 2018 20:05:00 +0000Supreme Court Won't Hear Challenge To California's Gun LawsNina Totenberghttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pDXxsRB4s7Y When Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg began her legal crusade, women were treated differently than men by law. By the time she first put on judicial robes she had already worked a judicial revolution. Today the issues are both the same and different. At front and center is the question of sexual harassment. At the Sundance Film Festival on Sunday, Ginsburg had this to say about the #MeToo movement: "It's about time. For so long women were silent, thinking there was nothing you could do about it, but now the law is on the side of women, or men, who encounter harassment and that's a good thing." Ginsburg isn't worried that the #MeToo movement might cause a backlash against women. "So far it's been great," she said. "When I see women appearing every place in numbers, I'm less worried about a backlash than I might have been 20 years ago." Ginsburg recalled moments from her time as both a student and teacher when she experienced sexismJustice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Reflects On The #MeToo Movement: 'It's About Time' http://krwg.org/post/justice-ruth-bader-ginsburg-reflects-metoo-movement-its-about-time
152463 as http://krwg.orgMon, 22 Jan 2018 10:04:00 +0000Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Reflects On The #MeToo Movement: 'It's About Time' Nina TotenbergUpdated at 8 p.m. ET The case before the U.S. Supreme Court Wednesday had a surprise plot twist. Jurors were told that the accused was guilty of a triple murder — but the lawyer making that statement was not the prosecutor; he was the defense attorney. The question before the justices was whether that violated the client's constitutional right to counsel. Justices liberal and conservative signaled that they have a problem with a lawyer who disregards his client's express wishes by conceding the defendant's guilt. The defendant, Robert McCoy, was charged with killing three family members in a vain attempt to find his estranged wife, Yolanda. With the help of police, she had fled her Louisiana home after McCoy, at knifepoint, threatened to kill her. She brought her infant daughter along but left her 17-year-old son with her parents so that he could finish high school and graduate. A month later, McCoy was arrested and charged with killing his wife's parents and her son. A 911 tapeIn Supreme Court, Skepticism Of Lawyer Who Overrode Client's Wish To Plead Not Guiltyhttp://krwg.org/post/do-you-have-right-plead-not-guilty-when-your-lawyer-disagrees
152181 as http://krwg.orgWed, 17 Jan 2018 12:34:00 +0000In Supreme Court, Skepticism Of Lawyer Who Overrode Client's Wish To Plead Not GuiltyNina TotenbergCopyright 2018 NPR. To see more, visit KELLY MCEVERS, HOST: At the U.S. Supreme Court today, the justices heard arguments in an important voting rights case. It tests whether Ohio's system of purging voters from its registration rolls violates federal law. The system in Ohio is the most aggressive in the country. It automatically strikes voters from the registry if they don't vote in two consecutive elections and if they fail to return a mailed card confirming their address. NPR legal affairs correspondent Nina Totenberg reports. NINA TOTENBERG, BYLINE: In 2016, a federal appeals court ruled that Ohio's voter purge law violates the National Voter Registration Act. That law requires states to take steps to keep their voting rolls up to date and accurate, but it specifically bars states from removing anyone from the rolls for failure to vote. On the steps of the Supreme Court today, Ohio's Republican secretary of state, Jon Husted, defended the state's purge system. (SOUNDBITE OFSupreme Court Appears Divided Over Ohio's 'Use-It Or Lose-It' Voter Registration Rulehttp://krwg.org/post/supreme-court-appears-divided-over-ohios-use-it-or-lose-it-voter-registration-rule
151783 as http://krwg.orgWed, 10 Jan 2018 22:16:00 +0000Supreme Court Appears Divided Over Ohio's 'Use-It Or Lose-It' Voter Registration RuleNina TotenbergUpdated at 4:53 p.m. ET The U.S. Supreme Court appeared divided Wednesday over whether Ohio's so-called use-it-or-lose-it voter registration rule violates federal law. Ohio, which has the most aggressive voter-purge system in the country, currently strikes voters from the registration rolls if they fail to vote in two consecutive elections — and if they fail to return a mailed address confirmation form. Pointed questioning from the justices on the bench highlighted a day that began with a confrontation on the steps of the court outside. It was between Ohio's secretary of state, Jon Husted, and the mayor of the town of Oak Harbor, Ohio , an Iraq and Afghanistan veteran, who argued that the state's position was outrageous. Purging people based on failure to return a card that might not get forwarded to you, or if you're in the military service and might not have an easy way to return it, makes it harder to vote, Mayor Joe Helle argued to Husted in full view of local and national media. In Key Voting-Rights Case, Court Appears Divided Over Ohio's 'Use It Or Lose It' Rulehttp://krwg.org/post/supreme-court-hears-challenge-ohios-use-it-or-lose-it-voter-system
151712 as http://krwg.orgWed, 10 Jan 2018 10:00:00 +0000In Key Voting-Rights Case, Court Appears Divided Over Ohio's 'Use It Or Lose It' RuleNina TotenbergTuesday was car day at the U.S. Supreme Court, as the justices heard arguments in two cases testing when police can search a motor vehicle without a warrant. While both cases challenged criminal convictions, both involved searches in circumstances that could well be encountered every day by law-abiding citizens. In both cases the justices seemed divided on how to draw the lines, with Trump appointee Neil Gorsuch giving indications he might side with the court's liberals, and Justice Anthony Kennedy — who so often casts the decisive fifth vote in cases — taking a harder line. The first case involved a search of a rental car, in which the driver's name wasn't on the rental contract. In the age of Zipcar, it's hardly unusual for a car renter to let his friends or family members drive a car he has leased, without listing those names on the contract. In the case before the Supreme Court, Terrence Byrd's fiancée gave him permission to drive a car she rented but didn't list him as one of theSupreme Court Hears Side-By-Side Search Cases On Rental Cars And Drivewayshttp://krwg.org/post/supreme-court-hears-side-side-search-cases-rental-cars-and-driveways
151733 as http://krwg.orgWed, 10 Jan 2018 08:09:00 +0000Supreme Court Hears Side-By-Side Search Cases On Rental Cars And DrivewaysNina TotenbergThey came by subway, and on foot. Two hundred forty middle and high school students from Washington, D.C., public schools. Destination: the federal courthouse at the foot of Capitol Hill. They were there to watch a re-enactment of a landmark Supreme Court case on a subject that is near and dear to their hearts — the First Amendment rights of students. What they learned, among other things, was that history repeats itself, even in their young lives. This is the third time that the judges of the federal appeals court have invited students to watch a re-enactment of Tinker v. the Des Moines Independent Community School District . Tinker was 13-year-old Mary Beth Tinker, one of five students who in 1965 were suspended for wearing black armbands to school to protest the Vietnam War. Four years later the U.S. Supreme Court ruled by a 7-to-2 vote for Tinker, affirming the principle that schoolchildren do not "shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at theStudents Identify With 50-Year-Old Supreme Court Case http://krwg.org/post/students-identify-50-year-old-supreme-court-case
151291 as http://krwg.orgWed, 03 Jan 2018 21:55:00 +0000Students Identify With 50-Year-Old Supreme Court Case Nina TotenbergThis week Trump judicial nominee Matthew Petersen withdrew his name, amid controversy. It was the third such withdrawal in 10 days. Even so, President Trump's record on filling judicial vacancies has far outdistanced his predecessors. Trump, aided by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., has won confirmation of 12 appeals court nominees. That's more than any president in his first year, and indeed, more than Presidents Obama and George W. Bush combined. Part of that success is due to the huge number of judicial vacancies that existed when Trump took office — 122. That staggering number is due to the fact that Republicans, who controlled the Senate in the last two years of the Obama presidency, confirmed only two appeals court judges — a record that dates back to the 1800s. Appeals court judges are considered particularly important because, although there are fewer of them, they establish legal precedents in the lower courts. Trial court judges, by contrast, preside over3 Trump Judicial Nominees Withdraw, Raising Some Questions About Vettinghttp://krwg.org/post/three-trump-judicial-nominees-withdraw-raising-some-questions-about-vetting
150542 as http://krwg.orgWed, 20 Dec 2017 01:16:00 +00003 Trump Judicial Nominees Withdraw, Raising Some Questions About VettingNina TotenbergUpdated at 7:51 p.m. ET Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts has transferred a formal investigation into sexual harassment claims from the West Coast to the federal appeals court based in New York. The transfer came at the request of the chief judge of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, based in California. That court had undertaken a formal inquiry against Judge Alex Kozinski after allegations of sexual harassment were published on Dec. 8 in The Washington Post. Kozinski, 67, is a distinguished and respected federal appeals court judge, appointed by Ronald Reagan, who has served on the 9th Circuit for 32 years, seven of them as chief judge. The Post reported that six former clerks and externs on the appeals court had accused Kozinski of subjecting them to inappropriate comments or exposing them to pornography. In a letter to Chief Justice Roberts, 9th Circuit Chief Judge Sidney Thomas said it is the practice of the appeals court to investigate published allegations of misconductChief Justice Roberts Sends Kozinski Inquiry To Another Judicial Councilhttp://krwg.org/post/chief-justice-roberts-sends-kozinski-inquiry-another-judicial-council
150346 as http://krwg.orgSat, 16 Dec 2017 00:51:00 +0000Chief Justice Roberts Sends Kozinski Inquiry To Another Judicial CouncilNina Totenberghttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wXKfyUPQ07I All eyes were on Justice Anthony Kennedy Tuesday at a riveting Supreme Court argument where the issue was whether a baker may refuse to create a wedding cake for a same-sex couple. Kennedy was the center of attention because, with the rest of the court appearing to be evenly split, he very likely will cast the deciding vote in the case. And he is the author of every major decision favoring gay rights that the Supreme Court has ever decided. A Reagan appointee, Kennedy is at the same time a fierce defender of the First Amendment right of free speech and the free exercise of religion. But the clashes inherent in those rights appeared to prompt some conflicting questions and positions from Kennedy. The case before the court involves much more than wedding cakes, and it could have huge implications for all retailers and service providers. That's because the baker, Jack Phillips, owner of the Denver-area Masterpiece Cakeshop, claims his FirstSupreme Court Seems Split In Case Of Baker Vs. Same-Sex Couple; Eyes Now On Kennedyhttp://krwg.org/post/supreme-court-sharply-divided-over-same-sex-wedding-cake-case
149634 as http://krwg.orgTue, 05 Dec 2017 22:00:00 +0000Supreme Court Seems Split In Case Of Baker Vs. Same-Sex Couple; Eyes Now On KennedyNina TotenbergAt the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday, the justices signaled they may be prepared to strike down the federal ban on sports betting. Enacted 25 years ago, the law prohibits states from legalizing sports betting, except where it was already legal. That exemption applied to Nevada, Delaware, Montana and Oregon. But now, with estimates of illegal betting running at $150 billion annually, cash-starved states are getting itchy. The 1992 law was sponsored by former basketball great Bill Bradley, who served three terms in the U.S. Senate. On Monday, New Jersey's outgoing Gov. Chris Christie carried the banner for getting rid of the Bradley Act. "If the federal government wants to pass a law to regulate and preempt, they have the right to do that," Christie said on the steps of the Supreme Court. "They didn't do that here. They foisted that upon us, on the people of the state of New Jersey, who voted 65 percent in 2011, that they no longer wanted this law." Inside the courtroom, former SolicitorOdds Drop On Sports-Betting Ban As Supreme Court Hears New Jersey Casehttp://krwg.org/post/supreme-court-considers-federal-ban-sports-betting
149564 as http://krwg.orgMon, 04 Dec 2017 21:41:00 +0000Odds Drop On Sports-Betting Ban As Supreme Court Hears New Jersey CaseNina Totenberghttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OKsWta_9Adg Every Supreme Court term there is at least one case that gets people's blood up. A case on which just about everyone has an opinion, often a ferocious opinion. That case comes before the justices Tuesday. On one side is the state of Colorado and its public accommodations law barring discrimination against customers based on their race, religion, gender or sexual orientation . On the other side is a baker who is morally opposed to same-sex marriage and refuses to create cakes for same-sex wedding receptions. A consensus about the facts but little else There is no dispute about the facts of the case. Charlie Craig and Dave Mullins were organizing a wedding reception for themselves in Lakewood, Colo., and were referred by their wedding planner to the Masterpiece Cakeshop, known in particular for its wedding cakes. When Mullins, along with Craig and his mother, arrived at the shop, bakery owner Jack Phillips greeted them politely, but, as soon asA Supreme Court Clash Between Artistry And The Rights Of Gay Coupleshttp://krwg.org/post/supreme-court-clash-between-artistry-and-rights-gay-couples
149520 as http://krwg.orgMon, 04 Dec 2017 10:00:00 +0000A Supreme Court Clash Between Artistry And The Rights Of Gay CouplesNina Totenberghttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5FwPgGx8TPo The justices of the U.S. Supreme Court have been known to play a long shot in an election betting pool or to bet a colleague about the outcome of the World Series. But the stakes are usually just a few dollars. Not so for the winners and losers in a case to be heard Monday that tests whether the federal ban on sports betting in most states unconstitutionally tramples on state sovereignty. The Bradley Act The ban was known as the Bradley Act, after its chief promoter, Sen. Bill Bradley, D-N.J. Bradley played 10 years for the New York Knicks, helping them win two NBA championships. The former Princeton star and Rhodes scholar went on to serve three terms in the Senate, winning accolades as a serious legislator. In all of his 18 years on Capitol Hill, Bradley introduced just one bill related to sports — a ban on sports betting. The bill, which passed easily, banned gambling on sports in 46 states, exempting four states — Delaware, Montana,New Jersey Takes On Major Professional Sports Leagues In Sports Betting Casehttp://krwg.org/post/new-jersey-takes-major-professional-sports-leagues-sports-betting-case
149476 as http://krwg.orgSun, 03 Dec 2017 12:00:00 +0000New Jersey Takes On Major Professional Sports Leagues In Sports Betting CaseNina TotenbergIn the political world, conservatives often accuse liberals of being soft on crime. At the U.S. court, that's not how it goes. Case in point, at the high court on Wednesday, a majority of the justices across ideological lines indicated they may be willing to impose new limits on the government's ability to gain access to large amounts of information retained by private companies in the digital age. The question before the court in Carpenter v. United States is whether police have to get a search warrant to obtain cellphone tracking information that is routinely kept by wireless providers. The case arose out of a series of armed robberies in 2010 and 2011 — robberies, ironically, aimed at stealing hundreds of new cellphones and selling them for tens of thousands of dollars. When police apprehended some members of the ring, the smaller fish implicated the leader of the ring, Timothy Carpenter, whereupon the police got a court order to get access to 127 days of cellphone tracking recordsJustices May Impose New Limits On Government Access To Cellphone Datahttp://krwg.org/post/justices-may-impose-new-limits-government-access-cellphone-data
149280 as http://krwg.orgThu, 30 Nov 2017 00:17:00 +0000Justices May Impose New Limits On Government Access To Cellphone Data